Citation: Yusoff, Mazirah (2012) Evaluating business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment. Doctoral thesis, Northumbria University.
This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/7991/
Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online:
i
EVALUATING BUSINESS STUDENT
SATISFACTION IN THE MALAYSIAN
PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT
MAZIRAH YUSOFF
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements of the
University of Northumbria at Newcastle
for the degree of
Professional Doctorate
Research undertaken in Newcastle Business
School
ii
Abstract
The educational environment is very dynamic and challenging with intensifying competition, as well as an increase use of public comparisons between institutions. Therefore, understanding and attempting to improve student satisfaction is becoming critical to educational institutions. In Malaysia, education is a leading industry and plays a vital role in national development. As the private education sector is growing rapidly, there is a mounting interest to use service quality improvement measures to enhance competitiveness.
The main aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the drivers that influence business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment. Specifically, this study seeks to measure the influence that each driver has on business student satisfaction and the importance of each driver to students; identify the underlying dimensions of the satisfaction drivers that influence business student satisfaction; evaluate the influence of factors such as gender, year of study, programme of study, semester grade and nationality on the results; identify areas of service priority towards better allocation of resources; and to discuss the practical implications of the results.
A positivist approach is adopted in this study, whereby 1,200 questionnaires have been distributed to undergraduate business students at four private educational institutions in Malaysia. A total of 823 responses were found to be usable for analysis giving a response rate of 69%. This study adopted and extended a “service-product bundle” model to
iii
evaluate the satisfaction level and the importance of the specific service attributes at the educational institutions.
Results were analysed using SPSS and quadrant analysis. The results revealed that students are satisfied and placed more importance on the physical facilities of an institution, followed by the teaching and learning drivers. Analysis of the underlying dimensions of the satisfaction drivers resulted in the adoption of a 12-factor solution after conducting several trial rotations. Significant differences exist between the demographic factors and six factors. Quadrant analysis conducted showed eight out of the 12 factors require attention by the educational institutions towards better allocation of their resources.
This study contributes to the marketing literature by providing an examination of several marketing constructs. This is an important contribution as it provides an improved understanding of student satisfaction and perceptions of the factors linking to the physical facilities and facilitating goods as well as the teaching and learning issues. From the professional practice contributions, this study will benefit the business schools and educational institutions in general as it provides practical information about what and how students of different levels of study; programme of study; gender; nationality; and level of academic performance consider important in their level of satisfaction and perceptions.
iv
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract ii Table of Contents iv Abbreviations xList of Tables xii
List of Figures xiv
List of Appendices xvi
Acknowledgements xvii
Dedication xviii
Declaration xix
Chapter 1: Introduction
1
1.0Introduction 2
1.1 Background Information to the Problem 3
1.2 Theoretical Foundation of the Study 5
1.3 Research Motivation 11
1.4 Research Context 12
1.5 Essence of the Research 16
1.6 Research Aim and Objectives 18
1.7 Research Methodology 19
1.8 Significance of the Study 20
v
Table of Contents (Continued)
1.10 Chapter Summary 23
Chapter Two:
Literature Review
24
2.0 Introduction 25
2.1 The Role of Students in Educational Institutions 26
2.2 Student Satisfaction 29
2.3 Student Experience 33
2.4 Service Quality 35
2.4.1 Service Quality in General 35
2.4.2 Service Quality in Higher Education 38 2.4.3 Service Quality and Student Satisfaction 41
2.5 Evaluation of Service Quality Models 45
2.5.1 SERVQUAL Model 45
2.5.2 Criticisms of SERVQUAL Model 46
2.5.3 SERVPERF Model 49
2.5.4 SERVQUAL and SERVPERF Models 50
2.5.5 Studies in Higher Education adopting 52 SERVQUAL and SERVPERF Models
2.5.6 Other Models of Service Quality and 62 Student Satisfaction
vi
Table of Contents (Continued)
2.6 Studies conducted in Malaysia on Service Quality 71 and Student Satisfaction
2.7 The Service-Product Bundle Model a review of the scale by 78 Douglas et al., (2006)
2.7.1 Drivers of Students’ Satisfaction and 82 Perceptions
2.7.1.1 Physical Facilities and Facilitating Goods 83 as Drivers
2.7.1.2 Teaching and Learning (Explicit and Implicit) 84 as Drivers
2.7.2 Demographic Profiles 85
2.7.3 Quadrant Analysis 87
2.8 Chapter Summary 92
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
953.0 Introduction 96
3.1 The Conceptual Framework 97
3.2 Research Philosophy 98
3.2.1 The Epistemology: Objectivism 99 3.2.2 The Theoretical Perspectives: Positivism 100
vii
Table of Contents (Continued)
3.2.3 Research Methodology 102
3.2.3.1 Justification on the adoption of quantitative strategy 102
3.2.3.2 Survey Methodology 105
3.3 Research Methods and Research Design 106
3.3.1 Questionnaire Structure and Content 106
3.3.2 Pre-testing and Development 109
3.3.3 Sampling Design 111 3.3.4 Reliability Analysis 113 3.3.5 Validity Analysis 113 3.3.6 Analytical Strategy 114 3.3.6.1 Descriptive Analysis 114 3.3.6.2 Factor Analysis 115
3.3.6.3 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 116
3.3.6.4 The Independent t-test 117
3.3.6.5 Quadrant Analysis 119
3.3.6.6 Other Data Analysis Methods not considered 119
3.4 Ethical Issues 119
viii
Table of Contents (Continued)
Chapter Four:
Results and Discussion
122
4.0 Introduction 123 4.1 Respondents’ Profiles 123 4.1.1 Gender 124 4.1.2 Year of Study 124 4.1.3 Nationality 125 4.1.4 Programme of Study 126 4.1.5 Semester Grade 127 4.1.6 Institutions 127
4.2 Ranking of Means of both the Satisfaction and Importance 128
Drivers
4.3 Identification of the Underlying Dimensions of the Satisfaction 136Drivers 4.3.1 Results of Factor Analysis 139
4.3.1.1Criteria for Goodness of Fit 143
4.3.1.2 Significance of Factor Loadings 143
4.3.1.3 Interpretation of Results 144
4.4 Examining the Influences of the Demographic Profiles on the 150
Results 4.4.1 ANOVA of factors and Year of Study 150
ix
Table of Contents (Continued)
4.4.3 ANOVA of Factors and Semester Grade 156
4.4.4 Independent t-tests of Factors and Gender 158
4.4.5 Independent t-tests of Factors and Nationality 158
4.4.6 Summary of Differences (ANOVA) 161
4.4.7 Summary of Differences (independent t-tests) 165
4.5 Identification of Areas of Service Priority towards better allocation 168
resources 4.5.1 Results of the Quadrant Analyses 170
4.5.2 Summary of the Quadrant Analyses 182
4.6 Chapter Summary 183
Chapter Five:
Conclusion
185
5.0 Introduction 186
5.1 Overview 186
5.2 Empirical Findings 190
5.3 Implications 195
5.4 Contributions 202
5.5 Limitations and Avenues for Further Research 206
References 209
x
Abbreviations/ Terms
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
UK United Kingdom
USA United States of America MOHE Ministry of Higher Education MQA Malaysian Quality Assurance
MQF Malaysian Qualifications Framework
SETARA Rating Systems for Malaysian Higher Education Institutions SERVQUAL Service Quality
SERVPERF Service Performance
IT Information Technology
HedPERF Higher Education Performance
SEEQ Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality MBA Master of Business Administration
CSEQ College Student Experiences Questionnaire LSEQ Lingnan Student Experiences Questionnaire
IP Importance Performance
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
SEM Structural Equation Modelling
OT Other programmes
xi
IB International Business
MK Marketing
BA Business Administration
FP Financial Planning
NBS Newcastle Business School
CI Confidence Interval
xii
List of Tables
Table
Page
1.1 Number of Students’ Enrolment in the Malaysian Higher 15 Educational Institutions from (2001-2010)
1.2 Number of International Students’ Enrolment in the Malaysian 15 Higher Educational Institutions from (2002-2010)
1.3 Research Objectives and Methods 20
2.1 Summary of definitions of Student Satisfaction 32 2.2 Summary of some of the Views of Service Quality and 43
Student Satisfaction
2.3 Comparing SERVQUAL and SERVPERF Models 51
2.4 Studies in Higher Education adopting SERVQUAL and 53 SERVPERF Models
2.5 Other Models of Service Quality and Student Satisfaction 63 2.6 Studies conducted in Malaysia on Service Quality and 72
Student Satisfaction
2.7 Studies adopting Quadrant Analysis 90
3.1 Differences between Quantitative and Qualitative Research 103 3.2 Drivers of Students’ Satisfaction and Perceptions 108 4.1 Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Satisfaction and 128
xiii
List of Tables (Continued)
Table
4.2 Rotated Factor Matrix for Satisfaction Drivers 140 4.3 ANOVA of the Factors and Year of Study 152 4.4 ANOVA of the Factors and Programme of Study 155 4.5 ANOVA of the Factors and Semester Grade 157 4.6 Independent t-tests of the Factors and Gender 159 4.7 Independent t-tests of the Factors and Nationality 160
4.8 Summary of ANOVA Results 161
4.9 Summary of independent t-test Results 166
5.1 Summary of Empirical Findings 194 5.2 Summary of the Implications 202 5.3 Summary of Areas of Contributions 205
xiv
List of Figures
Figure
Page
2.1 Generic version of the Quadrant analysis 89
3.1 Conceptual Framework 97
3.2 Research Philosophy 99
3.3 Format of Pretesting Questionnaire 110
3.4 Format of Revised Questionnaire used for Final Survey 110
4.1 Proportions of Respondents by Gender 123
4.2 Proportions of Respondents by Year of Study 124
4.3 Proportions of Respondents by Nationality 124
4.4 Proportions of Respondents by Programme of Study 125
4.5 Proportions of Respondents by Semester Grade 126
4.6 Proportions of Respondents by Institutions 127
4.8(a) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Professional Comfortable 170
Environment) 4.8(b) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Student Assessments and 171
Learning Experiences) 4.8(c) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Classroom Environment) 172
4.8(d) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Lecture Tutorial Facilitating 173
Goods 4.8(e) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Textbooks and Tuition Fees) 174
xv
List of Figures (Continued)
Figure
4.8(g) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Business Procedures) 176 4.8(h) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Relationship with teaching staff) 177 4.8(i) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Knowledgeable and Responsive 178
Faculty)
4.8(j) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Staff Helpfulness) 179 4.8(k) Importance-Satisfaction grid (Feedback and Class Sizes) 180 4.9 Summary of the Importance-Satisfaction grids (Quadrant 181
xvi
List of Appendices
Appendix
Page
3.1- Pretesting Results 230
3.2-Sample of Questionnaire used for the final survey 236
3.3-Participant’s Informed Consent form 242
3.4-Organisation Consent form 244
3.5-Gaining Access letter to institutions 246
4.1- Analysis of Importance and Satisfaction Mean Ratings used in 247 Quadrant Analysis
5.1- Proceedings of the 10th Annual South East Asian Association for 251
Institutional Research (SEAAIR 2010) Conference on Towards Global- Asean Institutional Research Strategic Alliances, Tagaytay City, The Philippines, pp 351-357
5.2- Paper presented at The International Conference on Sustainability in 259 Business, Putrajaya, Malaysia, 11-12 November 2010
5.3- Paper submitted for NBS Working Paper series-Annual Doctoral 273 Conference 2010 Special Edition
xvii
Acknowledgements
Many people have made my research journey possible from commencement to the completion of this piece of work -“my thesis”.
First and foremost, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to my Principal Supervisor, Professor Fraser McLeay for his invaluable guidance, and encouragement for making the completion of this thesis a reality. His excellent supervision has helped to develop my thinking and writing required to produce this thesis despite the long-distance communications. His generous attention and patience in giving this thesis substance, shape, as well as direction provided me with the confidence needed to undertake this challenging task. My special thanks also go to my second supervisor, Professor Helen Woodruffe-Burton for her advice and support, and to Dr. Ng Lai Hong for her assistance.
I specifically would like to thank all my respondents and the faculty members of the educational institutions who were involved in this research. This thesis would not have been possible without their participation. I also would like to thank the friendly and helpful academic and administrative staff at NBS for providing good assistance during the teaching blocks, the Annual Doctoral Conferences and throughout my doctoral studies.
Finally, special thanks and a deep sense of gratitude go to my mother, brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, and friends for their love, prayers, support, understanding, and interest from commencement to the final page of this thesis.
xviii
Dedication
In memory of my late father
Yusoff Abu Bakar, - who passed away peacefully on 22 October 2011. Thank you very much for being my pillar. This is for you, dad.
xix
Declaration
I declare that the work contained in this thesis has not been submitted for any other award and that it is all my own work.
Name: Mazirah Yusoff
Signature: Mazirah
1
Chapter One
2 1.0 Introduction
Understanding student satisfaction is critical to educational institutions as it provides inputs towards developing better tools to reach the students. Telford and Masson (2005) indicate that satisfaction in higher educational institutions is considered a measure of effectiveness in the sense that universities that are successful in providing a desirable service tend to adopt satisfaction as their strategic element towards differentiation. Cooper (2007) emphasizes that educational success depends on the efforts from the students as well as the universities. These views indicate that the educational institutions need to develop effective ways to identify and understand student satisfaction if they want to be successful, and that it has to be a continuous process.
Studies (Alridge and Rowley, 1998; Athiyaman, 1997; and Wiers-Jenssen et al., 2002) agree that understanding and measuring student satisfaction relates to a set of indicators that covers a student’s life and this involves two loosely bound categories, evaluating teaching and learning and also looking into total student experiences. Elliot and Shin (2002) state that focusing on student satisfaction enables universities to re-engineer their organisations to adapt to students’ needs and at the same time create a system towards continuous monitoring of the effectiveness of meeting or exceeding their needs. They are also of the opinion that student satisfaction provides an avenue through which a competitive advantage can be achieved in educational institutions.
Towards examining business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment, this chapter presents, analyses and validates the problem for which a
3
solution is sought by undertaking this study. The main aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the drivers that influence business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environments. The drivers here refer to the physical facilities and the facilitating goods as well as the explicit and implicit services, or also known as the teaching and learning drivers. This study validates the problem through highlighting the importance of understanding student satisfaction followed by the background information on the problem and its development. The theoretical foundation information on the area of student satisfaction will then be presented. The chapter continues by explaining the motivation of the study, the research context, essence, aims and objectives, and the significance of this study before providing an overview of the upcoming chapters in this thesis.
1.1 Background Information to the Problem
Education as a service provided to the students involves effective learning, an understanding of how the world works and developing a global view that guides behaviour and generally shapes the way the knowledge is acquired and used. It has also been acknowledged that in education as in business, the active participation of actors in the process greatly enhances the quality of the output. Students seem to be better educated if they are motivated to be actively involved in the educational process (Duque and Weeks, 2010).
Perkinson (2006) in his study reported that the private higher education market is growing. Year 2000 recorded over 90 million students enrolled in higher education
4
worldwide and the figure grew to more than 110 million in 2005 (Perkinson, 2006). He further states that there will be growing demographics and fiscal pressures ahead for higher education. Another report by World Bank (2002) indicates that higher education will experience the “the perfect storm” and that there are six converging forces of change due to the increasing importance of knowledge; the change in demographics; decline in public financing/-sourcing alternative financing; the further impact of globalization; the continued impact of internationalization; and the continuing information and communications technologies revolution.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in its study on the demography of education under the title “Higher Education to 2030,” discovers and summarises the following trends (OECD, 2008):
With regards to students, some of the observations are:
i) Student participation will continue to expand and contraction will only affect a small number of countries;
ii) The majority of the student population comprises women;
iii) A more varied mix of student population of which greater numbers comprise international students, older students and those studying part-time, etc;
iv) A broadening of the social base in higher education together with the uncertainty of how this will affect inequalities of educational opportunity between the social groups.
5
i) The academic profession will be more internationally-oriented and mobile but will still be structured in relation to the national circumstances;
ii) The activities of the profession will be more diversified and specialised and subject to varied employment contracts.
In relation to the above, there has been an increasing globalization in the higher education sector during the past decades. According to Altbach (2004), the number of students studying worldwide outside their home countries may increase to 8 million by the year 2025 and most of the international students are from countries in Asia, Africa and Europe. According to Mazzarol et al., (2003), there are three distinct waves of globalization in the international higher education industry. The first wave is linked to the usual model which involved the movement of students to host countries to study. The second wave involved twinning programmes with local institutions and this arrangement enables students to study a foreign degree in their own countries. The third wave, on the other hand, involved the setting up of branch campuses in foreign markets as well as the development of online courses which have been made possible through information technologies. The pioneers of this forward integration are Australia and the UK (Mazzarol et al., 2003). These trends and developments indicate the challenges faced by the educational sector and the need to provide and manage the services accordingly.
1.2 Theoretical Foundation of the Study
The above section provides some background information of the study relating to the higher education sector which this study is based on. This section will continue with the
6
major premise of this study, the basis for speculating the possible solution to the problem at hand, that is, the theoretical knowledge to this study.
Theories have been created to explain, predict and master relationships, events or behaviour. A theory actually generalises observations. As stated by May (1993), theory will reflect thinking, as such it will help researchers in making decisions and sense of the world which surrounds them. A theory, when linked to research, indicates a data collection process with a specific purpose that can be explained (May, 1993). In discussing student satisfaction, it has been observed that students vary with regards to their level of satisfaction of their educational experiences. These observations can be linked to several theories of student satisfaction.
In order to better understand the psychological dynamics of student satisfaction, the “happy-productive” student theory of Cotton et al’s., (2002) indicates that the psychological factors of coping, stress and well-being mediate student satisfaction. Their findings produce evidence that students had a significantly higher level of psychological distress and lower levels of satisfaction. The levels of the psychological distress in university students were linked to the work environment such as high work pressure, low control and low support from students. The theory also indicates that the high levels of strains and dissatisfaction seem to have their roots in the structure of the students’ work and the resulting levels of satisfaction in turn predict the performance levels.
7
The relationship between student satisfaction, attrition and academic performance have been observed through the “investment model” by Hatcher et al., (1992). This model indicates that satisfaction tends to increase when rewards in the form of grades are higher. In addition, when costs, for example, financial and time constraints are lower and alternate options of study are low, satisfaction was higher. This model actually helps to identify students at risk of dropping out, and counselling and other student support services can be offered to solve the problems. This can be seen as a preventive measure.
Another widely used theory is the theoretical approach based on consumer satisfaction. According to Churchill and Surprenant (1982), satisfaction is a function of the extent to which expectations when met with positive confirmations will lead to higher levels of satisfaction. In a university setting, this theory has been applied as it has been observed that when students’ expectations about the university are met with positive confirmations, they can lead to higher levels of satisfaction. Tinto (1982) develops a student integration theory of persistence or retention which is based on the relationships between students and the institutions. He put across that retention involves two commitments from the students, the goal commitment to obtain a college degree and the institutional commitment to obtain the degree at a specific institution. This perspective involves matching students’ motivation and academic ability and the institution’s ability to meet student expectations.
In discussing student motivation, several theories can be reviewed too as they can be linked to student satisfaction. Motivation has been referred to as the level of effort an
8
individual is willing to put in toward the achievement of a certain goal. Motivation also begins with an unsatisfied need. According to Biehler and Snowman (1993), motivation can be linked to the forces of arousal, selection, direction, and continuation of behaviour. From the definitions it can be seen that motivation is derived from within a person. As such, when linked to a university setting, it is the responsibility of the educational institutions to create conducive conditions that will enhance students’ motivations to pursue active and positive academic goals over a long period of time. Therefore, towards motivation and making students satisfied and happy in their quest for knowledge, theories of motivation are worth discussing as they are related to this study from the behavioural view, the cognitive view, the humanistic view and the achievement motivation theory.
The behavioural view emphasises the reinforcement of desired behaviour by using the extrinsic rewards. As stated by Biehler and Snowman (1993), the behavioural interpretations to learning help to understand why some students react in a favourable manner to some subjects and not others. Social theorists emphasise the effects of students’ identification and imitation of others, which result in their favourable academic outcomes. Psychologists have observed that overuse of extrinsic rewards such as praise and others may also lead to resentment and may cause dependency on the educators as such; their suggestion is to limit the negative effects of extrinsic rewards and to use them only when desired responses take place.
The cognitive view of motivation focuses on the arousal of cognitive disequilibrium as a way to motivate students in learning new things. When a student faces a problem, they
9
will desire to solve it. According to Piaget’s theory of cognitive development (1983), a state of disequilibrium will be produced when a person experiences a discrepancy between something new and what they knew. They will then be driven to work towards achieving equilibrium. Cognitive theory actually highlights intrinsic motivation. When educators use intrinsic motivation methods correctly and can arouse the disequilibrium, the students will then appreciate learning for its own sake.
Abraham Maslow is the most cited humanistic psychologist. Maslow (1943), in his paper called A Theory of Motivation, presented the idea that human beings have complex needs and these needs are directed toward goal attainment. Maslow proposed a five-level hierarchy of needs beginning with physiological needs as the most basic, such as hunger, thirst and shelter; safety needs which refer to the desire to find a safe and secure physical environment; belongingness needs refer to an individual’s desire to be accepted by their society or peers; esteem needs which refer to the desire to have a positive image as well as to have recognition from others; and self-actualisation, which is at the top of the pyramid, relates to the concern for the development of one’s potential. In the university setting, students will tend to seek satisfaction and self-actualisation provided their basic needs for safety, relaxation, belongingness, and a clean and conducive environment are addressed accordingly. Educators and educational institutions, therefore, play an important role towards fulfilling and satisfying these basic needs. Identifying the needs to fulfil is not an easy task to the educators, and that is the premise of this study, that is, to identify and evaluate the drivers of student satisfaction.
10
The achievement motivation theory, on the other hand, states that most people want to achieve and experience levels of aspiration. The level of aspiration concept indicates that people who desire to succeed at the highest possible level would want to avoid failure at the same time. This need of achievement will be increased when a person experiences success. When students experience success, their need for achievement will be strengthened. Psychologists, however, observed that some females may fear success if it interferes with their relationships (McClelland et al., 1958).
Further to the various theories of student satisfaction and motivation that explain the nature and extent of student satisfaction, many studies have also been conducted to measure the level of student satisfaction. In discussing the service quality and service quality models as the measurements to satisfy students, the most popular model has been the SERVQUAL model. It has been used by many researchers in many countries and in many industries including Malaysia (Ladhari, 2008). SERVPERF and many other models have also been used. The author of this thesis had reviewed the literature on the various models of service quality to measure student satisfaction and had accordingly identified a gap to be addressed in this study. The details of the review which led to the identification of the research gap will be presented in the literature chapter.
In light of this, this study hopes to extend the extant literature of student satisfaction by suggesting a conceptual framework, which is derived from engaging in the literature on student satisfaction, based on the service-product bundle model. The aim of this study is
11
to identify and evaluate the drivers of business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment.
1.3 Research Motivation
The author is particularly interested in the area of student satisfaction and it has been the phenomenon of interest since she started her teaching profession. This is one of the constructs which is the pulling factor that keeps her motivated and the time has come for the author to actually identify the drivers of business student satisfaction. According to Ramsden (1987), if we want to describe what students do, we ought to understand their learning experiences. Marjoribanks (1991) further states that if educators want to be successful in stimulating students’ learning then they have to understand the formidable intricacies of the undertakings. Understanding the students’ needs and the drivers that influence the students towards their learning process will help educators to address those needs better, and therefore, enhances the teaching and learning interaction.
It is the personal aspiration of the author to be able to understand how to create conducive learning environments for the students and thus, produce more positive outcomes from the interaction. Students are constantly evaluating the level of services as such; capturing those “moments of truth” during the service encounters can produce many discoveries worth looking into. The way towards understanding students and their levels of satisfaction is to conduct a study and to continuously monitor the situation. The author also hopes that this study is the starting point of more future studies and eventually to be
12
able to develop a corpus in this area as a form of her contributions to the world. The following section addresses the context of this study.
1.4 Research Context
Education is a growing industry in Malaysia and the country is gaining acceptance as an established study destination in the region. The education sector offers a variety of higher educational programmes as well as professional and specialised skill courses that are priced in a competitive manner and of high quality. In relation to this is the existing trend of setting up branch campuses in Malaysia by reputable universities from the UK and Australia. These universities offer undergraduate and postgraduate programmes identical to those of the overseas main campus. Monash University, Australia was the first branch campus to be set up in Malaysia in 1998; followed by Curtin University of Technology, Australia in 1999; The University of Nottingham, UK in 2000; Swinburne University of Technology, Australia in 2004; and the fifth one is Newcastle University Medicine, UK in 2009 (Education in Malaysia, 2010).
In addition are the twinning, franchised and external degree programmes in partnership with Malaysian educational institutions and various universities from the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, France, Germany, and New Zealand. Among the participating universities are University of Tasmania, Australia; RMIT University, Australia; University of New Castle, Australia; Oxford Brookes University, UK; University of Birmingham, UK, University of Hertfordshire, UK; University of Sheffield, UK;
13
University of Reading, UK; California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, USA; Universite de Toulouse, Le Mirail, France and many others.
In this thesis, business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment will be examined. The Malaysian higher education sector has become a centre of educational excellence in Asia. The Malaysian government is committed towards education. As such, the education sector has always enjoyed the highest national development budget as compared to other sectors such as agriculture, tourism, and the youth and sports sector among others. From the 2012 Budget recently announced, RM 50.2 billion has been allocated for the education sector as compared to RM 420 million for the tourism sector, RM 1.1 billion for the development of the agricultural sector, and RM 415 million for the youth and sports sector respectively (New Straits Times, 8 October, 2011).
Both public and private educational institutions play an important role in providing tertiary education to Malaysian youth and adults. The higher education sector is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE). The national quality agency, the Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) has been approved by the Parliament to implement the Malaysian Qualifications Framework (MQF) covering both public and private higher educational institutions. The MQA is one of the agencies under the MOHE. Its role is to implement the MQF as a basis for quality assurance in higher education as well as be a reference point for the criteria and standards for national qualifications (MOHE, 2009).
14
In Malaysia, private educational institutions play a major role in attracting international students to enrol and study. The private higher education sector consists of private colleges, private universities, university colleges and foreign university branch campuses, as well as distance learning centres. The main feature of these institutions is that they self-generate their resources from shareholders’ funds, students’ fees and business activities related to the education business (Soon, 1999). As such, they must be sustainable if they are going to survive. Fifteen private universities, 18 private university colleges, 5 foreign university campuses, and 488 private colleges in Malaysia were registered with the Ministry of Education in 2007 (MOHE, 2010).
The total number of students enrolled in higher educational institutions stood at 1,134,134 in 2010 (please refer to Table 1.1). A drop of about 4.5% from the year 2001-2005 was due to economic downturn. The market share of the private educational institutions, however, stood at 49.9% in 2010. Private higher education institutions have contributed enormously to the Malaysian economy via foreign exchange earnings from the influx of foreign students, which is currently made up of 86,923 international students from 141 countries (MOHE, 2010). From the figure, 62,709 students (72%) are enrolled at the private educational institutions and only another 28% at the public educational institutions (please refer to Table 1.2). The majority of the international students coming to Malaysia are from Iran, Indonesia, and China respectively. Malaysia is currently the world’s 11th most preferred destination for international students (MOHE, 2010).
15
Table 1.1 Number of Students’ Enrolment in the Malaysian Higher Educational Institutions from (2001-2010) Institutions Year 2001 2005 2010 Private Institutions 270,904 258,825 565,403 Public Institutions 304,628 307,121 462,780 Polytechnics 51,839 78,834 87,751 Community Colleges 1,108 9,873 16,200 Total 628,479 649,653 1,134,134 (Source: MOHE, 2007, 2010)
Table 1.2 Number of International Students’ Enrolment in the Malaysian Higher Educational Institutions from (2002-2010)
Institutions Year 2002 2005 2010 Private Institutions 22,827 33,903 62,709 Public Institutions 5,045 6,622 24,214 Total 27,872 40,525 86,923 (Source: MOHE, 2007, 2010)
The educational environment in Malaysia is very dynamic, competitive, and challenging and this situation is also confronting private educational institutions. In addition, with an official ranking system, the private educational institutions are being publicly compared, meaning that understanding student satisfaction is very important. Effective of May 2010, all higher education institutions in Malaysia are required to take part in the Rating System for Malaysian Higher Education Institutions (SETARA) to further enhance the quality of the education. A total of 25 criteria, including questions on student satisfaction, were captured through 82 indicators consisting of the generic framework of input, process and output and benchmark figures, were established for the indicators. The rating system uses a six-tier category with Tier 6 identified as Outstanding and Tier 1 as weak. The final
16
results indicated that out of 47 universities and university colleges rated, 18 institutions achieved a Tier 5 category, 25 institutions in Tier 4, and 4 in Tier 3. None of the institutions appear in Tier 6 or in Tiers 1 and 2 (University World News-Malaysia, 2009).
With regards to the ranking system and the inclusion of questions on student satisfaction, Letcher and Neves (2010) indicate that the findings by psychologists revealed student satisfaction helps to develop self-confidence which will lead towards developing their skills, and acquiring knowledge. This shows the importance of understanding the drivers of student satisfaction. This study examines undergraduate business satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment. The business programme seems to be a popular choice among students in Malaysia as compared to other programmes (MOHE, 2007). As stated by Ayob and Yaakub (1999), the private higher education responded to the government’s call to deliver a curriculum that is relevant to a nation and that is why the curriculum is heavily biased towards business and technological subjects as these two are considered important ingredients towards material progress.
1.5 Essence of the Research
As stated earlier, the educational environment is very dynamic, challenging and competitive. As such, understanding student satisfaction and providing quality education has become increasingly important to educational institutions. In response to that, this study goes beyond just examining student satisfaction as it also addresses the perceptions of the students of the specific attributes at an educational institution; identifies and evaluates the underlying dimensions of the satisfaction drivers as well as examine the
17
influence of the demographic factors such as gender, nationality, year of study, programme of study, and the semester grade have on the results. Many studies throughout the world, including Malaysia have used SERVQUAL model and SERVPERF to measure customer satisfaction and student satisfaction. This study, however, adopted and extended the “service-product bundle” model outlined by Sasser et al’s., (1978) and Douglas et al’s., (2006) to measure students’ satisfaction levels and their perceptions of the drivers that are important to them. Further discussion on this issue and the reasons for the adoption of this model will be presented in chapter two of this thesis.
The service-product bundle refers to the inseparable offering of many goods and services, and consists of three elements such as the physical or facilitating goods; the sensual service provided-the explicit service; and the psychological service-the implicit service. The bundle provides a more comprehensive understanding of the needs of the students than most other models evaluated and is therefore more suitable for the education sector. Even though teaching is the core service, other supporting and facilitating elements can help to enhance the interaction and make learning conducive.
In order to identify the areas of service priority towards better allocation of resources, satisfaction-importance grids will be developed and then evaluated through quadrant analysis, a graphic technique used to analyse importance and attribute ratings (Dillon et al., 1993). This tool will assist service providers to allocate their resources in a more efficient manner. Martilla and James (1977) were the first to apply the importance-performance analysis to the elements of a marketing programme. This technique can
18
produce good insights to the management of educational institutions to identify areas that may be utilising too many resources. Presentation of the results on the grid helps management to interpret the data and will enhance their usefulness in making strategic marketing decisions towards satisfying the students. Joseph and Joseph (1997) use this analysis in higher education and utilise a sample of final year students at a New Zealand university. O’Neil and Palmer (2004) use this analysis on a sample from Australia and Douglas et al., (2006) apply this analysis in their studies using samples drawn from the UK. Ford et al., (1999), on the other hand, conduct cross-cultural comparisons between samples from New Zealand and the USA.
1.6 Research Aim and Objectives
This section addresses the aim and objectives of this study. The main aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the drivers that influence business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment. More specifically, the research objectives are to:
i) review the literature in the area of student satisfaction to help identify the drivers of student satisfaction (discussed in the literature chapter);
ii) measure the influence that each driver has on business student satisfaction and the importance of each driver to students (addressed in the results chapter);
iii) identify the underlying dimensions of the satisfaction drivers that influence business student satisfaction (addressed in the results chapter);
19
iv) evaluate the influence of factors such as gender, year of study, programme of study, semester grade, and nationality have on the results (addressed in the results chapter) ;
v) identify the areas of service priority towards better allocation of resources (discussed in the results chapter); and
vi) discuss the practical implications of the study (elaborated in the conclusion chapter).
1.7 Research Methodology
A positivist approach is adopted in this study towards achieving the research aim and objectives mentioned in the earlier section. Table 1.3 provides an overview of the research methodology used in this study. The table shows that this study utilises both secondary and primary data to evaluate business student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment.
This study is adopting a survey methodology through the distribution of questionnaires to 1,200 undergraduate business students at four private educational institutions in Malaysia. Statistical analyses such as descriptive statistics, factor analysis, ANOVA, and independent t-tests will be used to analyse the data collected in the study. In addition, the use of quadrant analysis will help identify areas where educational institutions could better allocate resources. More details of the research methodology used in this study will be discussed in chapter three of this thesis.
20
Table 1.3 Research Objectives and Methods
Objectives Methods
To review the literature in the area of student satisfaction to help identify the drivers of
student satisfaction
Secondary data through literature search
To measure the influence that each driver has on business student satisfaction and the
importance of each driver to students
Survey through questionnaire. Statistical analysis which include descriptive such as mean, standard deviation have been computed
as well as the reliability test To identify the underlying dimensions of the
drivers that influence business student satisfaction
Factor analysis with principal component analysis and orthogonal method of rotation
(VARIMAX) adopted To evaluate the influence of factors such as
gender, year of study, programme of study, semester grade, and nationality have on the
results
Survey through questionnaire. Statistical analyses used include Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA) and post hoc comparison (Bonferroni method) where significance
differences existed on the independent variables of year of study, programme of study
and the semester grade.
Independent t-tests have been used on the analysis of gender and nationality as the
independent variables To identify the areas of service priority towards
better allocation of resources
The mean of the satisfaction and importance drivers have been used to develop the quadrant
analysis (the satisfaction-importance grid) To discuss the practical implications and
contributions of the study
Discussed in the conclusion chapter
1.8 Significance of the Study
Even though there are many studies on student satisfaction in general, the author seeks to identify and evaluate the drivers that influence student satisfaction in the Malaysian private educational environment due to several reasons. This study will provide significant contribution to business schools of private educational institutions and educational institutions in general. The outcomes will enable the educational institutions to develop better teaching and learning mechanisms as well as to extend the knowledge-base towards their professional practice. A better and clearer understanding of the
21
complexities of the teaching and learning, both explicit and implicit, can be achieved through this study. In addition it will help to identify strategies that will result in a more effective and efficient allocation of the university’s resources.
The current competitive educational environment in Malaysia and the worldwide university system make this research particularly significant. Understanding the drivers of student satisfaction, the perceptions of the students of the drivers, the underlying dimensions of the satisfaction drivers, and the influences of the demographic factors can help the educational providers to enhance their quality education and service levels. The educational institutions can also provide interesting and exciting learning experiences to the students. According to Kotler (2008), customers have to be energised. Students are evaluating the educational services and their experiences will determine their level of satisfaction. In view of that, the service environment needs to be increasingly innovative and competitive. Lovelock et al., (2007) clearly state that education is an example of mental-stimulus processing and the important implication here is that students as customers are concerned with, and affected by, the manner in which it is provided as well as what is provided. The results of this study can also help to enhance the teaching staff development programmes and hence, make teaching a respectable profession.
As Malaysia aspires to achieve educational excellence through its globalization and internationalization policies, further understanding of the needs of the international students is critical as this can facilitate the educational institutions to develop strategies to attract and strengthen student mobility to the country. This study will address that issue
22
too. Student satisfaction, as seen by Oliver and De Sarbo (1989), is the student’s subjective evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences associated with education and it relates to a favourable evaluation. It is being continuously shaped by repeated experiences in campus life. Ramsden (1991) is of the opinion that student satisfaction provides a useful indicator of the quality of teaching performance, and hence, can be considered as the outcome measurement of the education process.
1.9 Structure of the Thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters. The following paragraphs will provide an overview of the subsequent chapters of this thesis.
Chapter 2 focuses on the discussion of various literatures relating to student satisfaction and the perceptions of the importance of the factors to the students. This chapter begins with a discussion on the role of students in educational institutions, provides several definitions of student satisfaction, examines student experience, explains the concept of service quality and why it is important for this study, evaluates the service quality models as well as other models used to measure student satisfaction, presents the research gaps, explains the demographic variables, the importance issues, followed by the quadrant analysis.
Chapter 3 will explain and justify the research philosophy adopted in this study. The epistemology, theoretical perspective, methodology, and methods used will be discussed. Justifications will be provided on the choice of positivism as the theoretical perspective
23
of this study as well as highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. The chapter will also present the conceptual framework of the study; discuss the research design issues; which include the sampling design, the reliability and validity analyses, and the data analytical strategy. The ethical issues will also be discussed.
Chapter 4 will present the results of the study. This is the chapter that will put theory into practice whereby the data collected will be subject to various statistical tests before deriving the findings and presenting them accordingly.
Chapter 5 will use the findings from the earlier chapter to address the research aim and objectives set earlier and to arrive at the conceptual conclusion. Implications and contributions of the study as well as limitations of the study will then be addressed, followed by suggestions for future research.
1.10 Chapter Summary
In summary, this introduction chapter has provided the direction of the study by highlighting the importance of understanding student satisfaction, followed by presenting the background information of the problem and its development. The theoretical foundation of the study was then discussed leading to the impetus of the study. From here, the research context, essence, aim and objectives were discussed. The significance of the study has been provided too before presenting the structure of the thesis. The subsequent chapter will review the literature that answers the “so what” of the study.
24
Chapter Two
25 2.0 Introduction
This chapter commences by exploring the role of students in educational institutions. The focus of this study is on measuring business student satisfaction; therefore, it has recognised the fact that students have the right to engage in providing critical feedback. The section will include the arguments for and against the “student-as-customer” concept. Eagle and Brennan (2007) suggest that understanding the “student-as-customer” concept can further be enhanced by educating students on the importance of the role that they play in the higher education system. That is, to be informed customers in a complex and dynamic co-production process and environment. Various definitions of student satisfaction will then be presented and service quality issues discussed.
In order to identify and evaluate the drivers of student satisfaction, it is important to understand and evaluate the service quality models, such as SERVQUAL, SERVPERF and others. The criticisms, strengths and weaknesses of these models, in particular, will be uncovered and presented. The author will also discuss the research gaps and the reasons for adopting and extending the model used in this study. Literature on the drivers of students’ satisfaction and perceptions, the demographic variables and the adoption of the quadrant analysis towards better allocation of resources for the educational institutions will be also reviewed and presented.
26
2.1 The Role of Students in Educational Institutions
Evaluating the role of students in educational institutions is critical to measuring their level of satisfaction, which is the focus of this study. Even though exploring the issue of “student-as-customer” is not one of the objectives of this study, placing emphasis on student satisfaction recognises the fact that students are customers and they have the right to engage in giving their feedback. Some arguments for and against the “student-as-customer” concept will be briefly explored and presented, as the author believes this will set the scene for more discussion on satisfaction.
Sax (2004) is of the opinion that a bond is founded on familiarity and trust, a principle that existed in the early universities. This same principle can be applied to universities’ relationship with current students. He further states that the relationship between students and the institutions can be more personal and lasting with new technologies. Other authors such as Hennig-Thurau et al., (2001) suggest that students are not passive recipients of educational services and through their participation in the learning activities, are actually “co-producers” of their education.
Joseph and Joseph (1998) suggest that students are the primary beneficiaries of education, and as such, they should be treated as customers. This is because the educational environment is very competitive and in view of that, educational institutions have to develop aggressive strategies to satisfy students’ needs and enhance their market share. Kotze and Plessis (2003) also agree that students participate in an array of learning activities and they in fact “co-produce” their education by contributing to their own
27
satisfaction, quality, and value perceptions. Nejati et al., (2009) state that educational institutions have to pay special attention to the students as their main customers and to provide quality services that will satisfy them.
Yeo (2008) provides two views of students as customers. Institutions that regard students as the primary customers tend to link them as being involved in the input as well as output of the learning process. These institutions will develop strategies which will satisfy students’ needs in order to be competitive. On the other hand, institutions that regard the potential employers of the students as the primary customers will consider the economic reality of the situation and will develop the content of the lessons based on the needs of the employers as they believe that students have no conception of what they need to learn. In the same vein, Brennan and Bennington’s (1999) study from the Australian perspective indicates that students are not customers and that a variety of interests must be served by the higher education industry. Authors such as Albanese (1999) and Parsell (2000) also argue that students should not be treated as customers. The authors conduct studies on medical education and their rejection of the “student-as-customer” concept does not indicate lack of involvement of the students. They, however, suggest that the student’s role should be more of “learning worker” who has been empowered to participate in the educational process in a more positive and productive manner.
Eagle and Brennan (2007) examine the implications as well as consequences of the “student-as-customer concept” within the context of the dynamic university education
28
environment. They then propose that the “student-as-customer” concept could be adopted, provided a careful adoption of the term would lead to retaining the positive aspects: that is, promoting the legitimate interests of the students and at the same time to avoid the negative aspects of giving the students the idea that “the customer is always right”. Finney and Finney (2010) view the role of students in educational institutions in relation to the “exchange theory” and this produces some interesting insights. Some students simply exchange money for goods and services and this means that the students view their input as no more than the payment of tuition and fees in exchange for getting their grades and the qualification. Some students may view the exchange in a more meaningful manner which means that they contribute to the exchange process and they acknowledge the fact that they are the co-producers of the learning process. These two different philosophies will lead to different attitudes of the students at the educational institutions. Hart and Coates’ (2010) study on international student complaint behaviour suggest that East Asian students behave more like customers and provide feedback to the university when they are dissatisfied.
Oldfield and Baron (2000) propose that institutions should focus on what their students want instead of just making decisions based upon what the institutions perceive their students find important. In relation to that, Joseph et al., (2005) observe and state that research on service quality in higher education tends to rely too much on inputs from the academic insiders instead of the students. Douglas et al., (2006) are of the opinion that with regards to any monitoring of higher education quality, educational institutions should give priority to the student’s experience and its improvements. This study is
29
measuring the level of business student satisfaction; as such; evaluating the arguments presented in this section could help to understand the role of the students better. De Shields et al., (2005) put across the point that even though some researchers do not see “students-as-customers”, this does not change the fact that without students, the educational institutions would not have customers to serve. All the arguments discussed in this section indicate that both the students and the educational institutions have to be clear of their roles and the concepts have to be well-explained and interpreted so as to be meaningful in their implementation. The following section will proceed with this issue by providing the views and definitions of student satisfaction.
2.2 Student Satisfaction
Higher educational institutions are putting a lot of emphasis on understanding and attempting to improve student satisfaction due to current competitive pressures in the industry. Researchers (such as Rowley, 2003; and Tapp et al., 2004) agree that higher educational institutions will benefit from developing relationships with the students as this would provide an edge over competitors. Popli (2005) and Richardson (2005) however, state that before establishing the relationships, it is very important for the educational institutions to understand the factors that actually influence the students’ satisfaction. Alves and Raposo (2009) add that understanding the formation process of student satisfaction, and the valid as well as reliable ways to measure it, is the task of educational institutions. Reliable measurements of student satisfaction will enable educational institutions to have a clear view of their existing situation, compare with other educational institutions and analyse their evolution continuously.
30
Many researchers including Navarro et al., (2005a, b) and Richardson (2005) are of the opinion that student satisfaction is a complex and multi-dimensional concept. Hartman and Schmidt (1995) agree that the multi-dimensional nature of satisfaction is unanimously acknowledged for services in general and in higher education in particular. According to Elliot and Shin (2002), student satisfaction refers to a student’s favourable subjective evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences with education and is being shaped continually by the repeated experiences with the campus life. Elliot and Shin (2002) further states that student satisfaction can also have a favourable impact on fundraising activities and student motivation.
Student satisfaction is a short-term attitude that results from the evaluation of their experience with the education services rendered (Elliot and Healy, 2001). Students are involved in a continuous service encounter. Students are also constantly interacting with other students and engaged in both positive and negative word-of-mouth. This situation indicates that their opinions and perceptions are constantly changing (Rowley, 1996). Any analysis of student satisfaction has to take this into consideration. Hatcher et al., (1992) express that student satisfaction is the attraction, pride, or positive feelings students develop towards a programme or an institution. Navarro et al., (2005a, b) view student satisfaction as the final state of the psychological process. Hon (2002) refers student satisfaction to an experience of fulfilment of an expected outcome. Brown et al., (1998) discover that students’ evaluation of the quality of the course and other curriculum-related factors associated with a university lead to global satisfaction within a
31
university. Borden (1995), as well as Elliot and Shin (2002), find and agree that student satisfaction is linked to the association between student priorities and the environment of the campus. Telford and Masson (2005) believe that satisfaction in the higher educational institutions can be a measure of effectiveness to the providers.
Petruzellis et al., (2006) see student satisfaction as resulting from students’ assessment of a service based on comparing their perceptions and expectations of the service delivery. Sweeney and Ingram (2001) define student satisfaction as the perception of enjoyment as well as accomplishment associated with the learning environment. Mai (2005) surveys students in the US and in the UK and views student satisfaction as the overall feeling or as satisfaction associated with the elements of the transaction. Wu et al., (2010) studied satisfaction within the blended e-learning field and they are of the opinion that student satisfaction refers to the total students’ behavioural beliefs and attitudes resulting from aggregating all the benefits that students derive from using the blended e-learning system. Wiers-Jenssen et al., (2002) state that the approaches used in measuring student satisfaction may be a tool to connect the traditional and the academic views on how to enhance higher education, and towards more market-orientated perspectives. Table 2.1 presents a summary of various definitions of student satisfaction.
32
Table 2.1 Summary of Definitions of Student Satisfaction
Author/ Year/ Title Journal Definitions of Student Satisfaction
Hatcher et al., (1992) “Predicting college student
satisfaction, commitment, and attrition from investment model
constructs”
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Student Satisfaction is the attraction, pride, or positive feelings students develop towards a
programme or an institution.
Borden (1995) “Segmenting student markets with a student satisfaction and
priorities survey”
Research in Higher Education
Student Satisfaction is linked to the association between student priorities and the environment
of the campus. Elliot and Healy (2001)
“Key factors influencing student satisfaction related
to recruitment and retention”
Journal of Marketing for Higher Education
Student Satisfaction is a short-term attitude that results from the evaluation of their experience
with the education services rendered.
Sweeney and Ingram (2001) “A comparison of traditional Web-based tutorials in marketing education: An exploratory study” Journal of Marketing Education
Student Satisfaction refers to the perception of enjoyment as well accomplishment associated
with the learning environment.
Hon (2002) “Applying customer satisfaction theory
to community college planning of student
services”
iJournal: Insight in student services
Student Satisfaction refers to an experience of fulfilment of an expected outcome.
Elliot and Shin (2002) “Student satisfaction: An
alternative approach to assessing this important
concept”
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management
Student Satisfaction refers to the student’s favourable subjective evaluation of the various outco
